Top 32 tournament 1B McGwire vs Killebrew

[obxyankeefan]

Top 32 players ranked by BRWAR(as of 6/18/15).

1basemen Bracket is:

1 L Gehrig 6
32 J Giambi 0

16 J Beckley 0
17 T Helton 7

8 F Thomas 8
25 B Terry 0

9 J Thome 7
24 G Sisler 1

4 C Anson 3
29 N Cash 4

13 W McCovey 5
20 D Allen 0

5 R Connor 1
28 F McGriff 12

12 E Murray 10
21 J Olerud 3

3 J Foxx 15
30 L Berkman 0

14 M Cabrera 10
19 K Hernandez 7

6 J Bagwell 9
27 J Clark 1

11 J Mize 4
22 H Greenberg 6

2 A Pujols 12
31 M Teixeira 0

15 M McGwire
18 H Killebrew

7 D Brouthers
26 T Perez

10 R Palmeiro
23 W Clark

1 L Gehrig
17 T Helton

8 F Thomas
9 J Thome

29 N Cash
13 W McCovey

28 F McGriff
12 E Murray

3 J Foxx
14 M Cabrera

6 J Bagwell
22 H Greenberg

 

[obxyankeefan]

Mark McGwire Statistics and History | Baseball-Reference.com

Harmon Killebrew Statistics and History | Baseball-Reference.com

 

[calsnowskier]

I learn soooo much from these things.

Killebrew was hardly a 1B. I had no idea. He broke in as a 2B, moved to 3B and then alternated between 3B, OF and 1B throughout his career.

Killebrew might have gotten my vote if he played more 1B.

But you know my arguments, so I won't dwell on them here. I sadly vote Big Mac here.

 

[obxyankeefan]

This one is hard for me to choose. McGwire and Killer IMO are the same player except for McGwire's issue with congress and Killebrew moving around the field. I want to vote Killer, but am leaning towards Big Mac.

 

[calsnowskier]

Mac had 7 seasons with a 170 OPS+. Killebrew had 2.

Ignoring the 1B thing, Mac may be the vote here anyway. I think the only reason not to vote for him would the "stank". But the whole game had the "stank" when he played, so his OPS should reflect that. He was still all-time elite. Of his seven 170+ seasons, three of them were 200+.

 

[obxyankeefan]

Mac had 7 seasons with a 170 OPS+. Killebrew had 2.

Ignoring the 1B thing, Mac may be the vote here anyway. I think the only reason not to vote for him would the "stank". But the whole game had the "stank" when he played, so his OPS should reflect that. He was still all-time elite. Of his seven 170+ seasons, three of them were 200+.

The "stank" is viewed by way too many as cheating the game. While I don't go all the way to the extreme of completely ignoring it, I do think it has to be considered. McGwire did one thing and one thing only of which he may have been the best. But the "stank" helps you there more than any where else on the diamond.

 

[Bloody Brian Burke]

Mac had 7 seasons with a 170 OPS+. Killebrew had 2.

Ignoring the 1B thing, Mac may be the vote here anyway. I think the only reason not to vote for him would the "stank". But the whole game had the "stank" when he played, so his OPS should reflect that. He was still all-time elite. Of his seven 170+ seasons, three of them were 200+.

The "stank" is viewed by way too many as cheating the game. While I don't go all the way to the extreme of completely ignoring it, I do think it has to be considered. McGwire did one thing and one thing only of which he may have been the best. But the "stank" helps you there more than any where else on the diamond.

I try to ignore it for the most part, but McGwire got more benefit out of the stank than anybody save maybe Sosa and Canseco. Killebrew's close enough for me to use him as the one to take a bite out of Big Mac.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

The only debate here is whether steroid players are too tainted... Big Mac was significantly better offensively, with higher peaks...

The only thing in killebrew's advantage is that he had over 2000 more PA... That is close to 3 full seasons more of play...

And both can only really be compared offensively since both were terrible defenders...

 

[calsnowskier]

The only debate here is whether steroid players are too tainted... Big Mac was significantly better offensively, with higher peaks...

The only thing in killebrew's advantage is that he had over 2000 more PA... That is close to 3 full seasons more of play...

And both can only really be compared offensively since both were terrible defenders...

Except Killebrew was hardly a 1B...

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Except Killebrew was hardly a 1B...

honestly, I don't really care when they are both not great defensively... Killebrew is clearly MOSTLY a first baseman, he should be grouped in here... And at least with first baseman, defense is such a secondary stat for any analysis...

 

[Villain]

Major League Leaderboards » 2015 » Batters » Dashboard | FanGraphs Baseball

 

[navamind]

Major League Leaderboards » 2015 » Batters » Dashboard | FanGraphs Baseball

Wow, there's very few .300+ BABIP seasons between the two of them. Only one qualified season with a BABIP north of .300.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Wow, there's very few .300+ BABIP seasons between the two of them. Only one qualified season with a BABIP north of .300.

That is not surprising at all... power hitters have a lower BABIP because HRs are not included... The stat is really only intended to predict "luck"... If a player has lower than his normal BAPIP, you know he is unlucky and his stats should get better... if a player has a higher BABIP than his normal, then he is lucky and will likely get a regression...

 

[Villain]

Wow, there's very few .300+ BABIP seasons between the two of them. Only one qualified season with a BABIP north of .300.

Yeah, they're both "three true outcomes" guys. My favorite thing about BABIP is that it's basically been static over the entirety of baseball history. As far as I understand league average is almost also right about .298 or something. Makes for an excellent benchmark.

That is not surprising at all... power hitters have a lower BABIP because HRs are not included... The stat is really only intended to predict "luck"... If a player has lower than his normal BAPIP, you know he is unlucky and his stats should get better... if a player has a higher BABIP than his normal, then he is lucky and will likely get a regression...

Not its sole intention, just it's most-frequent interpretation.

 

[HammerDown]

I try to ignore it for the most part, but McGwire got more benefit out of the stank than anybody save maybe Sosa and Canseco. Killebrew's close enough for me to use him as the one to take a bite out of Big Mac.

Canseco benefited more from the juice than McGwire? I don't see how you can say that. Canseco had incredible physical talent, coordination and bat speed.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Yeah, they're both "three true outcomes" guys. My favorite thing about BABIP is that it's basically been static over the entirety of baseball history. As far as I understand league average is almost also right about .298 or something. Makes for an excellent benchmark.



Not its sole intention, just it's most-frequent interpretation.

then what are the other intentions... Really only heard it being used that way... cant really see it being used for anything else since again it doesn't include HRs...

 

[Villain]

then what are the other intentions... Really only heard it being used that way... cant really see it being used for anything else since again it doesn't include HRs...

First off, I really don't like the word "intention" because BABIP is just a raw number. It is used to show the outcomes that are affected by more than just the hitter or the pitcher. It's not weighted or anything. That doesn't really matter though, just me being pedantic.

As I said, "luck" is just the most common interpretation, but it can also show whether you just have a really good (or bad) defense behind you. When Greinke was on the Brewers, they had one of the worst defensive infields in the game. That was also his career high in BABIP. The other year he had a high mark was last season with many games played in front of a defense that included Matt Kemp (the consensus worst defensive outfielder in MLB), Andre Ethier, Hanley Ramirez, and Dee Gordon.

Any interpretation of BABIP should definitely consider other batted-ball metrics such as GB%/LD%/FB% and batted-ball velocity. If you're Clayton Kershaw and you have an extremely low BABIP, but your batted-ball velocity is also very, very low, then there's a reason to believe that it wasn't simply luck or defense that is leading to the successful outcomes.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

First off, I really don't like the word "intention" because BABIP is just a raw number. It is used to show the outcomes that are affected by more than just the hitter or the pitcher. It's not weighted or anything. That doesn't really matter though, just me being pedantic.

As I said, "luck" is just the most common interpretation, but it can also show whether you just have a really good (or bad) defense behind you. When Greinke was on the Brewers, they had one of the worst defensive infields in the game. That was also his career high in BABIP. The other year he had a high mark was last season with many games played in front of a defense that included Matt Kemp (the consensus worst defensive outfielder in MLB), Andre Ethier, Hanley Ramirez, and Dee Gordon.

Any interpretation of BABIP should definitely consider other batted-ball metrics such as GB%/LD%/FB% and batted-ball velocity. If you're Clayton Kershaw and you have an extremely low BABIP, but your batted-ball velocity is also very, very low, then there's a reason to believe that it wasn't simply luck or defense that is leading to the successful outcomes.

yea, I do like it for a pitcher, I think it is a much stronger statistic for pitchers... Just don't see any use for hitters besides the whole "luck" thing, and that is really a predictive stat not a production stat...

 

[obxyankeefan]

I am surprised with the vote on this one. We have had a couple of high profile roids user come up before and with not much dissension towards them. McGwire's stats are slightly better than Killer's, but Killebrew is leading at an almost 3:1 ratio.

 

[Villain]

yea, I do like it for a pitcher, I think it is a much stronger statistic for pitchers... Just don't see any use for hitters besides the whole "luck" thing, and that is really a predictive stat not a production stat...

Well, it can also work for batters. It's all in how you look at it. Same thing as with pitchers, but yeah it's a helpful tool to see if a guy is playing above or below a sustainable level of production. If a guy is squaring the ball up really well and hitting a bunch of line drives with excellent batted-ball velocity, but the hits just aren't dropping, an abnormally low BABIP could be a helpful tool to project him as a likely candidate to heat up in the future.

Same for guys who have an abnormally high BABIP - hits aren't going to fall like that forever (*cough* Dee Gordon *cough*). Only some 4 guys in the last 60 years or so have been able to have sustain a .400 BABIP for an entire season and each of them only pulled it off once. Obviously, throw in Babe Ruth and everyone from the 1800s into the mix and the story changes, but in today's game, it's just not realistic to expect consistent production at that level.

So yeah, I find BABIP to be very useful for both hitters and pitchers.